Daily Times

“As long as you are upright, donot care if your shadow is crooked.” (Chinese Proverb)

Charles Dickens in his novel “A Tale of Two Cities” describes the optimistic period of French Revolution that culminated at Jacobin Reign of Terror as, “it was the best of times, it was the worst of times…it was season of Light, it was the season of Darkness.” These lines hold equal sway in Modi’s India where masses expected a golden age but ended in a draconian era of a namesake Democracy.

Prashant Bhushan a public interest lawyer in the Supreme Court of India, posted two tweets to invite a storm in a tea cup. Bhushan is held guilty of contempt of court for his tweets on Chief Justice of India SA Bobde. SC gave lawyer four days to reconsider his statement and seek an unconditional apology by Aug 24.

P. Bhushan has been in the forefront of the fight against corruption in the higher judiciary and an advocate of transparency in it’s functioning. He has consistently pointed the flaws that are pervasive in the system. In 2009, he denounced eight out of the past sixteen Chief Justices of India as being corrupt. He often criticized that, “democracy has been destroyed in the last six years.” of Modi government.

Now if the final judgement punishes Prashant Bhushan it will be considered an infringement of fundamental right of free speech

In 2011 at a press conference Bhushan demanded, the Armed Forces Act to be revoked in Jammu and Kashmir. He added that the government of India should allow the people of Kashmir a right to separate if they wish to do so. This enraged Shiv Sena who attacked and targeting him as a supporter of anti-nationalist elements.

The alacrity in hearing the two contempt petitions when court isn’t working at full strength due to pandemic show that the Supreme Court of India is inclined to use Bhushan contempt case as an opportunity to silence his voice and make an example out of him for others.

Judges have often objected to unrestricted criticism on media calling it scandalous and tearing apart judicial reputation. At multiple occasions they displayed this desire to take measures to deal with such unbridled criticism. Social Media has often imputed judges for their unfair and reflexive government siding decisions. Warnings were issued against this tendency to cross a certain line. Prashant Bhushan crossed that line, and now harassed judges have found a fitting riposte to silence its critics.

Prashant Bhushan case is expected to end with a punishment. It won’t shock most Indians if he is sent to jail for a pair of social media posts instead, it would confirm the harsh reality that Modi government and Indian Judiciary are held together in an unholy alliance.

Ironically the case took a dramatic turn when the stubborn lawyer showed Gandhi’s resilience and submitted a reply, “it would be insincere and contemptuous on my part to offer an apology for the tweets that expressed what was and continues to be my bonafide belief.”

The statement he made is paraphrased from a statement in contempt proceedings against Gandhi in Bombay High Court in 1919 for publishing an article “Shaking Civil Resisters” against High Court notice served to Satyagrahi lawyers of Ahmedabad.

“I shall respectfully suffer the penalty that their Lordships may be pleased to impose upon me.”

The master stroke by Prashant Bhushan has left SC judges on a backfoot. Sedition and defamatory libels were part of colonial era when freedom of expression was restricted in order to suppress political dissent. They were originally designed to protect the Crown and government from any potential uprising. The British Law Commission in 2012 abolished the contempt law on scandalizing judges. It helped to waive off perception that judges used this power to quell any criticism. It was expected that abolishing these offences will allow the UK to take a lead in challenging similar laws in other countries, where they were used to suppress free speech.

Now if the final judgement punishes Prashant Bhushan it will be considered an infringement of fundamental right of free speech. Weaponizing prosecution against the exercise of free speech erode the foundations of democratic discourse. Any harsh decision of the judges might put the liberty of thought, expression and belief promised in the constitution at stake.

A single tweet with the photo of Chief Justice of India riding a Harley Davidson without wearing a mask during the pandemic which was compulsory for rest of general public mocks Indian sensibility. The power of this tweet is being felt now, any corresponding reaction in the form of penalty would erode the freedom promised in the constitution of world’s largest democracy.

Special Advisor (Pakistan Institute of Management, Lahore operated under Federal Ministry of Industries and Production, Islamabad) and Foreign Research Associate (Centre of Excellence, China Pakistan Economic Corridor, Islamabad)